Three Samsung handsets removed from list of accused devices at patent trial

Apple v. Samsung presiding Judge Lucy Koh on Monday ruled Samsung's GT-i9000, GT-i9100 and Galaxy Ace will be removed from the list of devices accused of infringing on Apple's patents.

Samsung's counsel argued against the three handsets being included in the trial's proceedings, saying that none of the smartphones were up for sale in the U.S. from Samsung or its subsidiaries, reports The Verge. Samsung's GT-i9000, GT-i9100 are the international variants of the Galaxy S, Galaxy S II, while the Galaxy Ace carried over the same branding when the South Korean company brought the device to the U.S.

Judge Koh's ruling came directly following the end of Apple's case presentation on Monday. Samsung successfully argued that Apple held the burden of proof in bringing patent infringement allegations against the three smartphones, noting the Cupertino company hadn't adequately argued why the devices were included in the first place.

Samsung at the same time attempted to argue that the entire case be dropped, claiming Apple did not sufficiently meet its legal burden in asserting allegations of trade dress infringement. All Things D notes Judge Koh heard an hour of arguments from both parties regarding the matter before decided the documents and testimony provided by Apple amounted to enough material to form a basis for jury deliberation.

Samsung's international variant of the Galaxy S, the GT-i9000.
Source: Samsung

Earlier on Monday, testimony from Apple expert witness Terry Musika estimated Samsung should pay between $2.5 billion and $2.75 billion if the jury finds the South Korean electronics giant infringed on all of Apple's asserted trade dress claims. On cross-examination, Musika was grilled over the various ways in which damages can be calculated, bringing the numbers into question.

The ruling to continue proceedings means Samsung will begin its defense starting with Ben Bederson, who will give testimony of alleged prior art pertaining to Apple's '915 "pinch to zoom" patent. Bederson, a University of Maryland professor, is credited with creating LaunchTile, an interface designed to facilitate one-handed operation of a smartphone. According to the technology's abstract, LaunchTile uses thumb gestures to zoom in and out of a maximum 36 on-screen applications.

"Obviously Samsung's defense is working and Apple's claims are breaking away like a sandcastle at high tide. It won't be long now and Apple will be paying Samsung royalties on every device they've sold! Hooray for Samsung!"

I say let the devices in the trial. Apple is GOING to win this one, and then they'll just use the result to sue Samsung in every other country, anyway.

Samsung's counsel argued against the three handsets being included in the trial's proceedings, saying that none of the smartphones were up for sale in the U.S. from Samsung or its subsidiaries, reports ...

the Galaxy Ace carried over the same branding when the South Korean company brought the device to the U.S.

Except, you don't know him and therefor, cannot kick his ass. Sorry! But I bet you couldn't kick his ass anyways since your weak ass can't even make it to a decent school to learn how to not be stupid.

Except, you don't know him and therefor, cannot kick his ass. Sorry! But I bet you couldn't kick his ass anyways since your weak ass can't even make it to a decent school to learn how to not be stupid.

Come on loganddigges. It is just a joke. Have you never seen Office Space?

The ruling to continue proceedings means Samsung will begin its defense starting with Ben Bederson, who will give testimony of alleged prior art pertaining to Apple's '915 "pinch to zoom" patent. Bederson, a University of Maryland professor, is credited with creating LaunchTile, an interface designed to facilitate one-handed operation of a smartphone. According to the technology's abstract, LaunchTile uses thumb gestures to zoom in and out of a maximum 36 on-screen applications.

There's an article detailing today's testimony from Bederson as well as Adam Bogue, the more interesting witness in my view.

"To keep hammering at its point, Samsung brought out Adam Bogue, the creator of theDiamondTouch table, a projector-based, multi-touch gesture-enabled computing technology that came out of Mitsubishi Electric Research Laboratories (MERL). Much like Microsoft's first Surface (now called PixelSense), the idea was that users could work around a the same table, Bogue explained.

DiamondTouch also had developed a follow-up technology called TableCloth, which Samsung showed off to once again take aim at Apple's bounce-back patent. TableCloth, which Bogue explained had been developed for Adobe's Flash platform, would bounce back images when they're pulled off screen.The primary gesture feature, called FractalZoom was one touch for scrolling, and two fingers to pinch and zoom, technology that Bogue said he actually demoed to Apple in a private meeting in late 2003. The technology was shown off to what Bogue said was "maybe half a dozen" Apple hardware engineers. The meeting didn't go anywhere, though Bogue kept an e-mail thread between him and the company, which Samsung submitted as evidence.

Bogue argued that while this technology was only found on the company's multi-touch PCs, it was readily viewable by anyone who came into the MERL lobby. There the company kept a demo unit that was loaded with the latest software.

The two gesture patents are just part of Apple's patent offense against Samsung."

There's an article detailing today's testimony from Bederson as well as Adam Bogue, the more interesting witness in my view.

Yes but only in your view. Interesting, maybe. Helpful to their case, not at all. I looked at what the "evidence" and frankly Samsung is grasping at straws. The evidence shown was not even similar to the Apple patents. It wasn't even close. Sad.

I say let the devices in the trial. Apple is GOING to win this one, and then they'll just use the result to sue Samsung in every other country, anyway.

Don't want to burst your bubble, but US court decisions mean diddly squat in court cases in other countries, as the recent UK case showed. Believe it or not, the rest of the world is capable of having legal systems that are perfectly capable of judging law on their own merits, not those of the US.

Don't want to burst your bubble, but US court decisions mean diddly squat in court cases in other countries, as the recent UK case showed. Believe it or not, the rest of the world is capable of having legal systems that are perfectly capable of judging law on their own merits, not those of the US.

The rubber-banding/bounce-back one definitely does, but hasn't been found to be valid in either of the two courts cases where Apple has asserted it. Imagine Apple filed for touchscreen actions as well in several countries.

I say let the devices in the trial. Apple is GOING to win this one, and then they'll just use the result to sue Samsung in every other country, anyway.

Don't want to burst your bubble, but US court decisions mean diddly squat in court cases in other countries, as the recent UK case showed. Believe it or not, the rest of the world is capable of having legal systems that are perfectly capable of judging law on their own merits, not those of the US.

Yeah, logic doesn't prevail in the UK courts either. The prior art for slide to unlock was not really related. This is a problem in every country that has judges trying to understand technology and not the law. Also, this action in the UK invalidated Apple's patent. Now the company that was cited as prior art (I believe was based in the UK), can go sue all of the companies doing a gesture to unlock the device. Sounds more like revenue generation for the UK than it does upholding the law.

Then enlighten me. Show me how those devices hardware wise look like an iPhone. I'm not talking Touch Wiz, I've already admitted it very much looks like iOS.

I have as much chance of convincing you as you are of convincing me otherwise. I'm afraid you're stuck with parroting for non-apple products for the rest of your life. I do thank you for doing your part in keeping this site going.Edited by uguysrnuts - 8/14/12 at 9:31am

Originally Posted by Granmastak: Labor unions managed to kill manufacturing a long time ago with their unreasonable demands. Now the people they were trying to protect, are out of a job.

I have as much chance of convincing you as you are of convincing me otherwise. I'm afraid you're stuck with parroting for non-apple products for the rest of your life. I do thank you for doing your part in keeping this site going.

You're totally wrong. I'm fully capable of seeing the side of a proper argument. I won't dodge any questions posed to me as many do here nor am I anti-Apple. I do own Apple devices as well as Android ones. I'm just a realist and see things for what they are. I will readily admit that Samsung indeed copied Apple and in other ways they didn't.

"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX